Legislation

Talking Points Regarding Revised Version of AB 74

DateMonday, April 25, 2011 at 7:01PM

Talking Points Regarding Revised Version of AB 74

  • We oppose any version of AB 74 passing because it is at best redundant and at worst a misguided tool to prohibit our community’s events.
  • Safe permitting regulations are already in place and in effect in California. This law is not needed and will do little to nothing to increase safety.
  • The wording of AB 74 is vague and this law could be easily abused to stop our vital cultural events from taking place in some of the best venues like the Cow Palace in San Francisco.
  • The number of expected attendee’s listed at 1,000 is far too low.  If this law is to pass at the minimum that number should be set at 10,000.  This law would create undue hardship on small events.
  • Calling this bill the “Raves Safety Act” is discriminatory and unfair as it singles out a style of music.  If this law is to pass, the name should at least be changed to “Concert and Music Festival Safety Act”.
  • Electronic Dance Music Events are vital economic resources for local small and large businesses and these events should be protected, not attacked.
  • EDM events provide a critical opportunity for outreach and education. We should be focusing our efforts on educating the community rather than trying to provide tools that could be used to shut it down.
  • Access to large, State owned venues are particularly needed for large-scale events that don’t otherwise have suitable locations.
  • There is no evidence that EDM events are any more dangerous than other concerts or other large gatherings of people, in fact evidence speaks to the contrary.

We urge you to REJECT AB 74 however if it is to pass please amend it to increase the number from 1,000 to 10,000 attendee’s and change the name to “Concert and Music Festival Safety Act”.

Save The Rave Proposed Amendments to AB 74

DateMonday, April 25, 2011 at 5:23PM

Save The Rave Proposed Amendments to AB 74

 

  • Section 1. Change from “Raves Safety Act” to “Concert and Music Festival Safety Act”

 

It is unfair to target these regulations on a specific genre of music, these are issues that affect all large scale music events.

 

  • 11000.10. (a) (1) – Change expected number of attendees from 1,000 to 10,000.

Most of the issues are associated with events of 10,000+ attendees and this could put undue hardship on smaller events.

Revised Version of AB 74

DateMonday, April 25, 2011 at 5:09PM

Here is the revised version of AB 74.  We do not support this legislation and at the minimum would like to see our amendments included if the legislation is to go through.

 

 

AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 24, 2011

INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Ma

DECEMBER 21, 2010

An act to add Section 421 to the Penal Code
11000.10 to the Government Code , relating to public
events.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 74, as amended, Ma. Public events: Raves:
prohibitions. event action plan. 
Existing law generally authorizes state agencies, including
district agricultural associations, to allow private individuals or
corporations to hold events on state property. 

This bill would require that any state agency that seeks to hold
an event with an expected attendance level over a specified amount on
property that is either owned or operated by a state agency to,
prior to the event, conduct a threat assessment that addresses
specified topics. This bill would also require that if the state
agency determines, based on the facts presented to it in the
assessment, that there is a strong probability that loss of life or
harm to the participants could occur, then the state agency must
require the promoter to prepare an event action plan that includes
specified information. This bill would also require the state agency
to approve the event action plan before the promoter may hold the
event. 

Existing law generally prohibits certain assemblages or events
that disturb the peace.
This bill would provide, subject to exceptions, that any person
who conducts a public event at night that includes prerecorded music
and lasts more than 31/2 hours is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable
by a fine of $10,000 or twice the actual or estimated gross receipts
for the event, whichever is greater.
By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated
local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this
act for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes no .

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the
Anti-Raves Act of 2011 Raves Safety Act 
.
SEC. 2. Section 421 is added to the Penal Code,
to read:
421. (a) Any person who conducts a public event at night that
includes prerecorded music and lasts more than three and one-half
hours is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of ten thousand
dollars ($10,000) or twice the actual or estimated gross receipts
for the event, whichever is greater.
(b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to a public event on private
property if the entity that conducts the public event has a business
license to operate a bar, club, theater, entertainment venue, or
other similar business, or to conduct sporting events, and conducting
the public event is consistent with the business license.
(c) For purposes of this section, “night” means that period
between sunset and sunrise.
SEC. 3. No reimbursement is required by this
act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local
agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a
new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or
changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of
Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a
crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the
California Constitution.
SEC. 2. Section 11000.10 is added to the 
Government Code , to read: 
11000.10. (a) (1) Any state agency, including, but not limited
to, a district agricultural association, or a joint powers agency
that includes a district agricultural association, that seeks to hold
an event with an expected attendance level over 1,000 participants
on property that is either owned or operated by a state agency shall,
at a normally scheduled meeting, and at least 30 days prior to the
event date, assess the threat of loss of life or harm to participants
that the event poses. The assessment shall consider, among others,
all of the following topics:
(A) Prior events held by the promoter.
(B) Prior events held at the facility.
(C) Similar types of events in general.
(D) The potential need for law enforcement.
(E) The potential need for onsite medical care.
(F) The potential for drug use and distribution.
(2) If the state agency determines that, based on the facts
presented to it in the assessment, there is a strong probability that
loss of life or harm to the participants could occur, then the state
agency shall require the promoter to prepare an event action plan.
The promoter shall not hold the event until the state agency approves
the event action plan. The event action plan shall address all of
the following:
(A) Health and safety concerns, including, but not limited to,
whether the promoter should provide free water, whether the promoter
should prohibit any person under 18 years of age from attending the
event, adequacy of ventilation, attendance capacity, and exit signs.
(B) Law enforcement concerns, including, but not limited to, the
ratio of peace officers or security guards to event attendees, and
mechanisms for the control of drug use and drug trafficking.
(C) The potential need for supplying educational pamphlets, or
other relevant emergency materials, including, but not limited to,
first aid, to help alleviate any risk posed by the event.
(b) For purposes of this section, “promoter” means the individual,
association, corporation, partnership, or other organization that
arranges, holds, organizes, or otherwise conducts the event. 

Protection of Safely Produced and Well Managed Youth Events

DateMonday, April 11, 2011 at 1:21PM

Events Protection Resolution Passes Unanimously at the Board of Supervisors in San Francisco!

Supervisor Scott Wiener sponsored an events protection resolution in response to the Save The Rave Hearing at City Hall last month. It was passed unanimously by the SF Board of Supervisors! Read the resolution here:

[Protection of Safely Produced and Well Managed Youth Events]

Resolution calling for the protection of safely produced and well managed youth events, including music oriented events, in the City of San Francisco.

WHEREAS, The Board of Supervisors recognizes that music oriented nightclubs, special events, and outdoor music festivals are a vital cultural and economic resource, generating hundreds of millions of dollars each year in tourism and revenue for the City; and

WHEREAS, Since suitable venues for large, legal and safe special events are few in San Francisco, access to venues are particularly necessary for peaceful assembly and cultural celebration, particularly for youth who cannot attend events for persons 21 and over; and,

WHEREAS, San Francisco recognizes that shutting down permitted venues and special events, absent legitimate public safety concerns, does not reduce harm because it leads to a proliferation of illegal unpermitted events; and,

WHEREAS, Issues of alcohol and substance abuse and violence are broad society problems that are not created by entertainment events – meaning that while event producers share the burden of addressing these problems on their premises, they do not bear the sole responsibility for addressing them; and;

WHEREAS, The Youth Commission has expressed concern that San Francisco is lacking compared to other large cities in terms of entertainment options for youth; and

WHEREAS, At times in San Francisco, the response to problems around youth entertainment is to eliminate youth venues and events rather than utilize harm reduction procedures and create solutions; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors and the City and County of San Francisco acknowledge the importance of safely produced youth events, included music oriented events, with respect to culture, economy and community; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors strongly recommends that the Mayor’s Office and relevant City departments, in particular Police, Fire, Public Health, Entertainment Commission, Interdepartmental Staff Committee on Traffic and Transportation (ISCOTT), Recreation and Parks, and the Port work together to develop solutions to allow these youth events to continue and flourish both in private venues as well as on city property.

The New “Rave Act” AB 74

DateThursday, December 23, 2010 at 2:06AM

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1.  This act shall be known and may be cited as the

Anti-Raves Act of 2011.

SEC. 2.  Section 421 is added to the Penal Code, to read:

421.  (a) Any person who conducts a public event at night that

includes prerecorded music and lasts more than three and one-half

hours is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of ten thousand

dollars ($10,000) or twice the actual or estimated gross receipts

for the event, whichever is greater.

(b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to a public event on private

property if the entity that conducts the public event has a business

license to operate a bar, club, theater, entertainment venue, or

other similar business, or to conduct sporting events, and conducting

the public event is consistent with the business license.

(c) For purposes of this section, “night” means that period

between sunset and sunrise.

SEC. 3.  No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to

Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because

the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school

district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or

infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty

for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the

Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the

meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s